Gang Psychology

Minister Farrakhan speaks about the destructive psychology of gang culture

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• farrakhan
• gang
• mediaPAD
• media-pad.com

[lifeinyouisgod]

Well its a divide and conquer thing just like the white man and rib did in Africa and elsewhere and actually to himself in Europa for 5500 years. But gang violence would not be destructive if it were directed against the white man and rib because that white race who will not submit to Allah even Jesus MUST REAP THE DESTRUCTION THAT THEY HAVE SOWN FOR 6000 YEARS ALL OVER THE WORLD. It is not destructive but instead constructive when the sowers of destruction reap that destruction amen.

[DRXCIX]

(Panel #3): Two, three or five separate acts of violence is still not in the category of "a violent" organization or nation. However, we will agree to disagree.

[DRXCIX]

(Panel #2): Like the fact that I made the point initially that the NOI's history is "minimally violent" & you disagreed or refuted my point, but only made a statement voicing your disagreement by referencing Malcolm & then showed no documentation/reference to back up this refutation or to document that my INITIAL statement is wrong. Re Malcolm's statement that you quoted (Boston killings); I don't disagree with his statement; therefore, I don't have to prove anything.(See Panel #3)

[DRXCIX]

@QRF11B I agree that we will agree to disagree. However, for the sake of clarity, my definition of "minimal violence" is based on quantity of violent acts (number of separate acts) not the severity of the act or the severity of the violence. The reason for follow up notes & referencing the GPI was for clarity; so we don't misunderstand each other which can occur when discussing any issue in such a limited space.(See Panel #2)

[DRXCIX]

@QRF11B You are right, my bad, here-say was a typo. Sorry about that. However, I made the statement that there is minimal violence and do not need to prove my own point - the individual that refutes a point is the one that must show proof to show that the statement is wrong. Thanks for your effort anyway.

[DRXCIX]

@QRF11B I am trying to show you how one judge a history of violence in a nation or an organization. Also, if one can only state acts of violence but have no documented reference then it becomes ALLEGED ACTS or just OPINION. To be categorized as violent for a nation or an organization, documented proof (not here-say by Malcolm or anyone) with researchable references would be needed & more than a few violent acts with references is needed to be in a category of being "violent".

[DRXCIX]

(Panel #2): Nations that are minimally violent have a low Global Peace Index of 1-5 like Iceland, New Zealand, Japan & Denmark while nations that have a high incidence of violence have a high Global Peace Index of 147-153 like the Sudan, Iraq, Somalia & Afghanistan. The NOI is in the low category.

[DRXCIX]

@QRF11B You are right, we disagree on what is minimal, because if all you can list in the 80+ years history of the NOI is ONE alleged violent act, then that is what is defined as a minimal history of violence. Minimal means the low occurrence of a thing over a distinct period of time. The Global Peace Index is a measure of a nation’s violence record, whether minimal or really violent.(See Panel #2)

[DRXCIX]

@QRF11B That's definitely your opinion since, as you know, Malcolm X can't have an opinion. Even if you want to attribute his death to the NOI (which is debatable), for an 80+ year history, if that is all you can try to attribute to the NOI, then that is defined as minimal.

[curtisjones400]

Lous Farrakhan is 100% right